Honda has rethink on wind turbines
9:20am Thursday 25th August 2011 in News By Adam Kula
THE widely panned plan for three giant wind turbines at Honda’s car plant has been scaled down.
Honda and Ecotricity say they are now prepared to settle for just two turbines in response to public pressure – with the one closest to residents’ homes being removed.
But it comes only a fortnight before a council planning meeting was expected to take place, which would have decided whether to allow them to be built.
Now the meeting is likely to be moved to November to discuss the proposal.
Under the new proposal, the size and shape of the two remaining turbines remains the same.
The only difference is the one nearest Highworth Road being rubbed off the blueprints.
Campaigners are claiming it as a victory for public opinion.
Des Fitzpatrick, 64, of South Marston, chairman of lobby group Ill Wind, said: “The expression of massive public opinion in opposition to siting wind turbines so close to homes and schools has forced Honda to think again. It is great to see local democracy having an effect.
“It is clear now that Honda and Ecotricity realised their planning application would fail to meet acceptable standards on noise, flicker and visual impact and that the planning committee would reject it.
“As to the future, we will have to see the revised proposals but if this just amounts to moving the deck chairs on the titanic, we will continue to fight against building giant turbines in inappropriate places.”
And Gina Banks, 44, of Highworth Road, said: “It’s good news – that one was far too close to us. But I’ll be interested to see what happens. It’s positive that Honda seem to be listening to the reaction of people.
“We would still be able to see turbines two and three from our properties regardless. It’s less of an impact of course, but for the guys in South Marston, they’re still 600 metres away.”
Coun Dale Heenan (Con, Covingham and Nythe), chairman of the planning committee, said: “It’s very unusual to come at the last minute like this. But it shows the company has been very responsible and receptive to change.”
The new proposal was put in jointly with Honda and Ecotricity, the company which will build and install the turbines.
An Ecotricity spokesman said the move does not represent a new planning application, but was only additional information which will be set before the planning committee.
In a joint statement, the companies said: “Taking into account the strength of local opinion at the two previous planning committee meetings, this offers a pragmatic workable solution that addresses the concerns of the local community, whilst enabling Honda to remain competitive in a global market and reduce its environmental impact.
“Honda and Ecotricity still firmly believe that all three turbines originally proposed are viable, and this is reflected in the fact that they have been previously recommended for approval by Swindon Borough Council.
“If this was not the situation, Honda would not have presented three turbines to Swindon Borough Council for consideration.”
Ecotricity has sent 700 letters to residents to explain the change.
Comments(60)
StillPav
says...
9:51am Thu 25 Aug 11
.
Will the last person out please turn off the lights.
dc the 2nd
says...
10:01am Thu 25 Aug 11
STFCLetsGetRocked
says...
10:33am Thu 25 Aug 11
I certainly would not want one of those monstrosities next door, and whilst not a fan of the Hippy Hippy Sheik I say well done on listening to the people. Good to know democracy still works both ways eh?
Robfm
says...
10:54am Thu 25 Aug 11
The Council Officers approved the 3 option, so as I said on Points West, it is time the revised plan be allowed to go through, to benefit the whole town.
oldlegtrailer
says...
11:04am Thu 25 Aug 11
and then work out how far a piece of the blade is likely to travel and at what force.
This is not scare tactics but scientific fact. If I was a Honda worker with one of those hovering over my head I would be worried THE UNIONS SHOULD BE LOOKING IN TO THIS ON THE GROUNDS OF HEALTH AND SAFETY. IF A BLADE FRACTURES DUE TO FATIGUE - DEATH IS VERY POSSIBLE BY DECAPITATION OR SIMILAR
dc the 2nd
says...
11:16am Thu 25 Aug 11
oldlegtrailer wrote:There are thousands of turbines on the planet already, so you should be able to give a case reference of "blade fatigue", otherwise you're just scaremongering.
Rob fm - if you are able please calculate the angular velocity of the tip of the blade
and then work out how far a piece of the blade is likely to travel and at what force.
This is not scare tactics but scientific fact. If I was a Honda worker with one of those hovering over my head I would be worried THE UNIONS SHOULD BE LOOKING IN TO THIS ON THE GROUNDS OF HEALTH AND SAFETY. IF A BLADE FRACTURES DUE TO FATIGUE - DEATH IS VERY POSSIBLE BY DECAPITATION OR SIMILAR
i got in a car this morning and risked death and decapitation on the M4.
Al Smith
says...
11:22am Thu 25 Aug 11
oldlegtrailer wrote:The turbine in Reading has loads of office blocks around it and to the best of my knowledge there have never been any mass decapitations. They're widely used in similar situations in Germany, once again I've not heard any tales of headless Germans!
Rob fm - if you are able please calculate the angular velocity of the tip of the blade
and then work out how far a piece of the blade is likely to travel and at what force.
This is not scare tactics but scientific fact. If I was a Honda worker with one of those hovering over my head I would be worried THE UNIONS SHOULD BE LOOKING IN TO THIS ON THE GROUNDS OF HEALTH AND SAFETY. IF A BLADE FRACTURES DUE TO FATIGUE - DEATH IS VERY POSSIBLE BY DECAPITATION OR SIMILAR
-
If the Unions look into anything they'll be looking into Honda telling Swindon to get stuffed as they're off to Poland or Turkey or where ever.
-
As for risk of death/injury there are FAR greater risks in the actual Honda plant with all the machinery there.
Robfm
says...
11:28am Thu 25 Aug 11
Statistically I could win the lottery, it's possible but it's a 14 million to 1 chance.
Perhaps you would like to post the calculations on which this statement was made, because in all that I have read, which includes an incredible amount of anti turbine stuff, I have never heard any other organisation or individual make such an outlandish claim.
Because the actual facts are these between 1975 and 2006 there have been 32 deaths involving wind turbines. 30 involving industrial accidents involving installers, 1 suicide by hanging inside the turbine pole, and a female parachutist in Germany on her first solo jump being struck by a rotating blade.
Many of the industrial deaths resulted from workers taking short cuts, or safety gear failures, nothing to do with the turbines themselves.
There are over 300 industrial fatalities in the UK alone each year.
That is the true perspective.
Robfm
says...
11:32am Thu 25 Aug 11
Gooey
says...
12:47pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Robfm
says...
12:55pm Thu 25 Aug 11
stut41
says...
1:28pm Thu 25 Aug 11
structurally these things look great. noise wise though, the constant low frequency swoosh/thump of the blades 24 hours a day would effect a lot of peoples days and nights.
honda were allowed the build their 2nd production line, and people did not object because the noise levels wouldn't change much.
these turbines will effect people with the noise, and as they will operate throughout the night would disturb peoples sleep.
if that means that they want to up sticks off to turkey, then they haven't really got much commitment for the town anyway.
regarding the reading comment - smaller turbine, alongside motorway so less people to object or disturb. after 8pm the A419 does get quite quiet, so the noise would then disturb the residents.
incidentially...http
://www.dailymail.co.
uk/news/article-1355
419/UKs-useless-wind
-turbine-Cost-130k-r
aise-electricity-wor
th-100k.html
Please sign this...http://epetit
ions.direct.gov.uk/p
etitions/1685
stut41
says...
1:31pm Thu 25 Aug 11
http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/p
etitions/1685
Antonio Lorusso
says...
1:47pm Thu 25 Aug 11
STFCLetsGetRocked wrote:If their claims are untruthful, or irrelevant, but are able to abuse the planning system or democracy for their own purposes, that is a concern for everybody who falls under the council's dominion. Listening is good, but that doesn't mean you have to accept what people say blindly.
Let's not forget that it's ok for those of us who don't live near the proposed development to pass judgement - we don't live there, so should we really be critical of people who live there?
I certainly would not want one of those monstrosities next door, and whilst not a fan of the Hippy Hippy Sheik I say well done on listening to the people. Good to know democracy still works both ways eh?
Antonio Lorusso
says...
1:52pm Thu 25 Aug 11
I don't suppose the adver has data to back this statement up?
nicewilly
says...
2:12pm Thu 25 Aug 11
keyboardcapers
says...
3:11pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Hmmmf
says...
3:30pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Robfm wrote:Funny how within 15 seconds on Google I easily found two examples of blade fatigue causing catastrophic failure at windscam farms. I suspect, Robfm, you saw them too, but being anxious to cash in on windscam and make money out of other bill payers you elected to ignore them in your search for 'the true perspective.'
oldlegtrailer, simple question, has it ever happened, has anyone ever been killed by an active turbine blade coming off. How many blades have ever broken in the UK.
Statistically I could win the lottery, it's possible but it's a 14 million to 1 chance.
Perhaps you would like to post the calculations on which this statement was made, because in all that I have read, which includes an incredible amount of anti turbine stuff, I have never heard any other organisation or individual make such an outlandish claim.
Because the actual facts are these between 1975 and 2006 there have been 32 deaths involving wind turbines. 30 involving industrial accidents involving installers, 1 suicide by hanging inside the turbine pole, and a female parachutist in Germany on her first solo jump being struck by a rotating blade.
Many of the industrial deaths resulted from workers taking short cuts, or safety gear failures, nothing to do with the turbines themselves.
There are over 300 industrial fatalities in the UK alone each year.
That is the true perspective.
.
One of the failures was spectacularly blamed on UFOs and was all over the national news.
.
"Sources of blade damage include mishandling during delivery and/or installation, lightning strikes, ice, thermal cycling, leading and trailing edge erosion, fatigue, moisture intrusion and foreign object impact." Also easily found with Google. "Has it ever happened?" you ask. Yes of course it has.
.
The truth is out there, Robfm, but only if you want to see it.
.
http://www.minotdail
ynews.com/page/conte
nt.detail/id/557842/
Brand-new-blade.html
?nav=5010
.
http://www.heraldsco
tland.com/ufos-ruled
-out-after-wind-turb
ine-damaged-1.902356
Hmmmf
says...
3:42pm Thu 25 Aug 11
.
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=CqEccgR0q
-o
.
Of course, it never happens, does it?
Red Grouse
says...
4:25pm Thu 25 Aug 11
There is a very long list of accidents in this country and abroad involving turbine blade and blade debris throw over hundreds of metres.
Cathness Windfarm Information Forum maintains a database of wind turbine accidents at:
http://www.caithness
windfarms.co.uk/
see also:
http://www.windbyte.
co.uk/safety.html
for a roundup of some of the info. on turbine safety.
There are also a number of academic papers on the subject which have formulae for possible blade throw distances, e.g. - Health & Safety Laboratory, 'Numerical Modelling of Wind Turbine Blade Throw', Report No.
ESS/2006/27:
http://windfarmactio
n.files.wordpress.co
m/2011/08/numerical-
modelling-of-wind-tu
rbine-blade-throw-hs
l-report-19-april-20
07_.pdf
Quote: "Nineteen of the throws were reported as 100m or less, including six cases where the blade dropped to the ground close to the turbine shaft. In all but one of the remaining cases, the throw distance was reported as 600m or less. A single incident at Burgos in Spain was reported as resulting in blade fragment throw of 'almost 1000m'."
NB this is from 2007, when 100m or less turbines were the norm.
Blades come off turbines with monotonous regularity, I certainly would not wish to live within 1000m of a large turbine, both in terms of safety and of noise.
Red Grouse
says...
4:32pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Just to underline how rare blade accidents are, I can quote examples of it happening more than once at the same wind array in this country.
Indeed, there is the example of the blade on a 190ft turbine at Sheffield University breaking twice within 15 months:
http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/news/newstopi
cs/howaboutthat/6284
573/Wind-turbine-in-
Sheffield-broken-by-
wind-for-second-time
.html
itsamess
says...
4:49pm Thu 25 Aug 11
will put his illconceived claims when he supports any project--for his own reasons and ignore facts. His expertise is well known to be non existent a true googler who will pick up any information that suits his mindset and not the first time he has gone against the feelings of the villagers.
As i pointed out in previous threads i am very much in favour of greener energies. I do not agree with farm sites filled with solar panels-particularly when of lower quality.
As i also said--if the offending turbine
was moved to another location the project should be granted and both Honda and Ecotricity have now seen the light and removed that from the equation.
It will not be too long before a new breed of wind turbines arrives aided by new technology.
I say to Illwind--do not give out half truths--you have gone as far as you can go. The current plans i have very little doubt will go through. Likewise scaremongering rarely works with flawed information.
Even Angrier Monkey
says...
5:36pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Robfm
says...
5:52pm Thu 25 Aug 11
I did not claim there had not been problems with blades shattering, and the UFO one mentioned shows clearly the debris is with the field close to the actual pylon, the bulk of it actually at the base.
What I did say, 'oldlegtrailer, simple question, has it ever happened, has anyone ever been killed by an active turbine blade coming off. How many blades have ever broken in the UK.'
I am still waiting for the formula used to calculate such a failure as described.
The failure in the video was due to the inability of the engineers (and by the way that was in Denmark not the UK) to shut it down it was not a computer controlled but mechanically controlled one where 3 mechanical fail safes didn't work. Nothing like the design or operation of the Honda ones.
Finally the list of accidents, please look even this extended list shows 'industrial accidents as opposed to harm to the general public. And also includes incidents have absolutely nothing to do with turbines, simply to boost the numbers like two boats colliding off Ramsgate, what was the connection, the one boat belonged to the Wind Farm Company
gwenllian
says...
6:12pm Thu 25 Aug 11
I am heartily sick of seeing your constant rubbish, lies and rants in the Evening Advertiser comments. Why don't you go on a nice long holiday so we can all have a rest from you, you're a pathetic know-all who actually knows nothing at all.
Robfm
says...
6:28pm Thu 25 Aug 11
stut41
says...
6:45pm Thu 25 Aug 11
and when you google this firms nearest current turbine "reading wind turbine" it doesn't exactly fill you with confidence that its being subsidised to run and only running at 17%.
i bet the people who are criticising the residents of stratton and south marston are those that don't even live in the area and would not be effected by this.
Robfm
says...
6:59pm Thu 25 Aug 11
stut41
says...
7:07pm Thu 25 Aug 11
but, financially its a lame duck being subsidised by the tax payer.
""According to latest figures, the 280ft generator towering over the M4 near Reading worked at just 15 per cent of its capacity last year. And although it generated electricity worth an estimated £100,000, it had to be subsidised with £130,000 of public money.
Since it was switched on in 2005, it has been given £600,000 in public subsidies while working at an average of 17 per cent of its capacity.""
just google "reading wind turbine" and its post 1.
Read more: http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
1355419/UKs-useless-
wind-turbine-Cost-13
0k-raise-electricity
-worth-100k.html#ixz
z1W468uhEC
you can't say that being 40 miles further west along with M4 is going to mean we're that much windier?
Robfm
says...
7:11pm Thu 25 Aug 11
itsamess
says...
7:30pm Thu 25 Aug 11
dc the 2nd
says...
7:48pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Even Angrier Monkey wrote:Agreed
I think they should build them in the hope that some of the moaning gits of south bloody marston get dacapitated to be honest.
dc the 2nd
says...
7:55pm Thu 25 Aug 11
*definitely not about house prices at all.
stut41
says...
8:57pm Thu 25 Aug 11
those people who have worked hard to buy their home deserve for their investment to be protected, not have xx% wiped off it because of constant noise pollution.
in reality though, i would expect financial loss to fall someway down the list of concerns after noise/health issues caused by living next to these.
if the health effects are of no concern, how come the House of Lords are still waiting to read the bill "Wind Turbines (Minimum Distances from Residential Premises) Bill"?
dc the 2nd
says...
9:04pm Thu 25 Aug 11
k you and goodnight.
stut41
says...
9:25pm Thu 25 Aug 11
and what are Honda doing? ....protecting their shareholders investment? shaving £2m off a £30m electrical bill? if they were concerned about the environment, i am sure that they could buy 3 turbines out at sea in a windfarm and feed those into the grid. they gain from contributing green energy to the grid.
those resident that rent can easily relocate if they don't like the noise. those that own, can't so easy. so homeowners are screwed if there turns out to be problems greater than planned. no one will want to buy, and we'll be stuck with a house falling in value with mortgages greater than they are worth. can't sell, can't move. stuck with the noise.
what is so wrong about thinking about your families future, which inevitably will revolve around financial circumstances.
Red Grouse
says...
9:28pm Thu 25 Aug 11
if it is any comfort, the Honda turbines are unlikely to throw blades very far because the wind resource at the site is laughably bad (you can check it yourself on the DECC website, using the NOABL database: http://www.decc.gov.
uk/en/windspeed/defa
ult.aspx).
These turbines would not be economic without the huge Renewables Obligation subsidy that is paid from consumer bills.
dc the 2nd
says...
9:33pm Thu 25 Aug 11
stut41
says...
9:43pm Thu 25 Aug 11
dc the 2nd wrote:if you get to the stage of owning one and someone decides to build a motorway/prison/high speed rail link next door after you've bought it, don't come crying about the noise.
You own a house not the future value of a house. Nimby.
dc the 2nd
says...
9:46pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Hmmmf
says...
10:09pm Thu 25 Aug 11
dc the 2nd
says...
10:27pm Thu 25 Aug 11
tom1994
says...
10:48pm Thu 25 Aug 11
tonypc
says...
11:23pm Thu 25 Aug 11
Red Grouse
says...
1:53am Fri 26 Aug 11
The Danish government, unlike the UK government and their friends in the wind industry, recognises that massive industrial turbines damage property values. They have a scheme which forces wind developers to fully compensate householders for their loss:
"An erector of a wind turbine has a duty to pay compensation for loss of value of real property following the erection of the wind turbine. The size of the loss of value is determined by an appraisal authority.
"If a property loses more than 1 per cent in value due to the erection of new wind turbines, the owner is ensured full compensation for his loss. The owner of the property must notify his claim for compensation for loss of value to Energinet.dk. As owner of the property you can choose to enter into a voluntary agreement for compensation for the loss of value with the erector of the wind turbine, or you can ask an impartial appraisal authority to make a specific appraisal of the property and determine the scope of your loss."
(Danish Energy Agency website: ‘Loss of value to real property due the erection of wind turbines’: http://www.ens.dk/en
-us/supply/renewable
-energy/windpower/on
shore-wind-power/los
s-of-value-to-real-p
roperty/sider/forsid
e.aspx)
Robfm
says...
8:02am Fri 26 Aug 11
In your second post, yes the Danish Government insist on compensation, but who do you think ultimately pays for that, the tax payer/utility user of course. So it's OK for a householder to be compensated by their fellow rate payers.
As for vested interest, of course I have, how is wishing to protect the livelihood and prosperity of my family any different from those who wish to protect the value of their properties.
It is rather ironic though that it is because of vocal campaigns like Illwind that the myth of lowering of house prices is spreading, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
But step back from the personal considerations, and look at the wider interests of the people of Swindon. As has been said by a former Head Office Honda employee they do have contingency plans to move production, if the circumstances of production in the UK makes the option more profitable (yes I know profit is a dirty word, except of course profit from selling ones house).
It is widely accepted that directly and indirectly 10,000 jobs could be lost. But consider this, it only takes one big company to relocate abroad for others to follow. Look at what happened with call centres, first a drip then a torrent.
So I say to Illwind, you are basking in your victory, now consider the thousands whose lives and livelihoods could be blighted if Honda left Swindon, and for the record it wouldn't be us, as we have less than 2% direct Honda business.
AGINGER
says...
8:56am Fri 26 Aug 11
Resident humans in Stratton and South Marston,I went to the Stratton PO on Monday last,the STINK was terrible,its not just windmills that will be the devaluer,wait until the prospective buyer gets a whiff of the air that hangs over the bigger area than the 500m threat of blade noise, and bloggers who put factual information on here,keep up the good work.
My suggestion to the Elected Representatives of the Parishes who would be affected by the proposed windfarm,do not make a final decision until Parliament has declared the Law regarding minimum distance,other than that I am sure that those who deliberately run the residents down will just vanish in the Co2 haze.
Red Grouse
says...
9:38am Fri 26 Aug 11
Could we have some logic here, please.
You say loss of property value is a "myth". So why does the Danish Government run a statutory compensation scheme?
I have NOT claimed that the 1000 metre claim is at all likely. But, there is recorded evidence of a much smaller turbine throwing blade debris for nearly 1000 metres at Burgos.
There are also numerous examples of blade debris travelling hundreds of metres and I have provided the evidence for blade throw and the mathematical formula for blade throw distance that you and your fellow Windies have asked for.
Finally, the excessive subsidies mean that turbines in areas with poor wind speeds still make lots of money, especially when the capaital investment can be written off against tax by a business like Honda.
For the record the Audit Office, Ofgem (the industry regulator) and numerous parliamentary committees have criticised the excessive levels and cost to the consumer of the RO subsidy.
"Developers of renewable energy schemes such as wind farms are profiteering from the Government's drive to curb carbon emissions by making customers pay more for their electricity than is necessary, the energy regulator Ofgem warned yesterday .
"Publishing figures which reveal that the cost of the so-called 'renewables obligation' is at least eight times greater than other schemes designed to combat climate change, Ofgem called for a wholesale shake-up of the current arrangements.
"Ofgem calculates that since the obligation was introduced in 2002 customers have been overcharged by £740m ...". ('Watchdog urges overhaul of green energy scheme', Independent, 23, January 2007).
Since then there has been a major INCREASE in RO costs as offshore subsides have been doubled.
Red Grouse
says...
10:07am Fri 26 Aug 11
In their non technical summary, Ecotricity/Honda use forecast output figures based on a 29.4% load factor (average output as a percentage of headline caopacity). This bears no relation to the actual wind resource but is taken from 2009 onshore averages for the UK published by DECC.
They could have used the grid square database figure from DECC, but that would have shown how insignificant the output will really be from these massive turbines.
They could even have done what most responsible wind developers do - base their claims on measured wind speeds, using Lidar wind measurement equipment.
itsamess
says...
10:17am Fri 26 Aug 11
Correct
Robfm
says...
10:21am Fri 26 Aug 11
th.org.uk/documents/
safety.pdf
It was in 2000/1 and was an old style turbine.
Turning to the subsides, I have never been in favour of big business getting these and have stated so many times. But I see no reason why funds should not be made available for small businesses and villages to be subsidised to reduce their costs.
As for this type of renewable being expensive, you are correct but what is happening re the proposed sites for nuclear, the obvious realistic solution, campaigns are waging to stop them.
So you pays your money and takes your chance, electricity after 2015 or darkness, we are told that is the stark choice.
Red Grouse
says...
11:25am Fri 26 Aug 11
You are implying that it is an either/or choice.
Wind is a parallel generating system.
National Grid tell us that even if we build all the planned wind capacity - unlikely, it will bankrupt the consumer and industry - we will still need an equivalent thermal capacity for the frequent occasions when wind is failing to generate any significant amount of power:
"Recent history has shown that wind power output at the time of the winter peak can be very low. The winter peak normally occurs when temperatures are low and this often results from anti-cyclonic conditions that also mean very little wind. High pressure normally extends over a large area and this could mean there would be very little wind generation in Western Europe."
(National Grid, 'Winter Outlook Report 2009/10'. 'Generation Side Risks', 167, p.54).
This has been clearly demonstrated for the last four years.
The irony is that Centrica have told government that the energy industry is ulikely to build the c.17GW of new gas-fuelled capacity we need in the next 6 years when wind production is being prioritised.
Who wants to operate a CCGT gas plant that is being inefficiently cycled (with increased CO2 emissions and wear and tear to turbines) just to shadow erratic wind output?
So we will end up with a system where we pay wind operators wholesale plus subsidies NOT to generate during periods of low load (this is already happening) and to maintain system stability. And we will also have to pay subsidies to gas power operators not to generate when heavily subsidised wind power is actually producing - usually when least needed.
It is lose, lose and the customer will foot the bill.
Robfm
says...
11:33am Fri 26 Aug 11
I am sure if grants were given to small business to build their turbines, and solar combined on the understanding that excess electricity returned to the grid FOC many would jump at the chance.
Red Grouse
says...
12:04pm Fri 26 Aug 11
Unfortunately, the wind industry has conned the technically illiterate policians who run this country into subscribing to the wind scam for the last 10 years.
We have also surrendered control of our energy production and markets to foreign-owned conglomerates.
It is now too late to do anything but build masses of new gas-powered capacity and heavily subsidise co-firing of big coal plant in order to keep it open until such time as new nuclear comes onstream.
A sensible government would have ensured that sufficient low-carbon baseload generating capacity - e.g. nuclear and biomass - had been built before we were forced to shut old nuclear stations and coal-fired capacity that contravenes EU directives.
Most domestic turbines do not cover the carbon costs of their manufacture and maintenance according to government surveys. Small solar in our latitudes produces very little and is very expensively subsidised.
The problems we are facing concern baseload power generation.
I am actually not against embedded wind power on sites where it makes sense in terms of wind resource and proximity to people.
The costs of subsidising wind power generation are doing considerable damage to British industry:
"Stan Higgins, chief executive of the North East Process Industry Cluster, which represents the region’s chemical and pharmaceutical companies, says current government energy policies are 'suicidal' and could end up destroying entire sectors of manufacturing.
"'Four or five years ago , energy was the twelfth most expensive element of manufacturing a tablet,' he says. 'Now it is second or third.
"'We are trying to be the first country in Europe to introduce , but it’s crazy to do this independently. Our energy costs are six to seven per cent higher than the European average and that's not sustainable.
"'Most of our big companies are not UK-owned – they have no allegiance to the UK whatever. They will go where they get the best deal. We can compete with the world, but we just need a level playing field."
('British jobs gone with the wind', The Telegraph, 17 July, 2011).
Red Grouse
says...
12:05pm Fri 26 Aug 11
Unfortunately, the wind industry has conned the technically illiterate policians who run this country into subscribing to the wind scam for the last 10 years.
We have also surrendered control of our energy production and markets to foreign-owned conglomerates.
It is now too late to do anything but build masses of new gas-powered capacity and heavily subsidise co-firing of big coal plant in order to keep it open until such time as new nuclear comes onstream.
A sensible government would have ensured that sufficient low-carbon baseload generating capacity - e.g. nuclear and biomass - had been built before we were forced to shut old nuclear stations and coal-fired capacity that contravenes EU directives.
Most domestic turbines do not cover the carbon costs of their manufacture and maintenance according to government surveys. Small solar in our latitudes produces very little and is very expensively subsidised.
The problems we are facing concern baseload power generation.
I am actually not against embedded wind power on sites where it makes sense in terms of wind resource and proximity to people.
The costs of subsidising wind power generation are doing considerable damage to British industry:
"Stan Higgins, chief executive of the North East Process Industry Cluster, which represents the region’s chemical and pharmaceutical companies, says current government energy policies are 'suicidal' and could end up destroying entire sectors of manufacturing.
"'Four or five years ago , energy was the twelfth most expensive element of manufacturing a tablet,' he says. 'Now it is second or third.
"'We are trying to be the first country in Europe to introduce , but it’s crazy to do this independently. Our energy costs are six to seven per cent higher than the European average and that's not sustainable.
"'Most of our big companies are not UK-owned – they have no allegiance to the UK whatever. They will go where they get the best deal. We can compete with the world, but we just need a level playing field."
('British jobs gone with the wind', The Telegraph, 17 July, 2011).
Robfm
says...
12:42pm Fri 26 Aug 11
Part of the problem is very much the promise after promise about alternative solutions which are simply decades away. Clean coal sounds great but how close is that when the test facilities in America are being abandoned one only last month.
We have heard much about Fusion Generators but the best guest for even a test facility is 2035, and I know there will now be a you don't what's really going on diatribe from Walter but hey when all those he quotes actually are giving these time scales, we all know he is wrong.
itsamess
says...
9:46pm Fri 26 Aug 11
Mercure. You cannot even get it right
claiming fusion generators--no such thing. Clean coal--no such thing.
Coalite was branded as a smokeless
fuel in the late 50s--yet it was not much more than common coke--and smokeless but still high in carbons.
You have **** about the mighty germans for bringing acre upon acre of solar panels of which the only part
made in germany is the film--a way to
get over import regulations-financia
lly
and quality wise british companies could have supplied and fitted and mantained these projects--and we would have been lining british workers and users pockets--and got a better deal for consumers who are paying over the odds for electricity.
How about growing food as there is a world shortage. How do you explain
how france has the capability to produce so much electricity--more than they require--and we buy some
quite large amounts from them--we even allow them to take over our energy providers. Do they fight our corner--or their countries interests.
You most certainly have no idea as to what is really going on in the energy field as you always come up with information that has no merit--it just suits your particular agenda
AGINGER
says...
8:38am Sat 27 Aug 11
Red Grouse
says...
9:19pm Tue 30 Aug 11
The official figures on the balancing mechanism website show you why wind power generation is a parallel generating system and cannot be compared to baseload generators.
See: http://www.bmreports
.com/bsp/bsp_home.ht
m
Robfm says...
9:47am Thu 25 Aug 11
Such scare tactics will simply lead to less people believing the campaigners, such as the two villagers I was speaking to yesterday afternoon.
It does seem as I have said previously that the Council intend to defer this until after October 1st.